George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty On All Charges

Some sixteen months and a couple weeks ago, events brought Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman together in a confrontation that ended with the death of Martin and a police investigation that led to the filing of no charges against Zimmerman initially. Subsequently the story went nationwide as protests ensued and political pressure forced the Governor of Florida to appoint a Special Prosecutor who eventually indicted Zimmerman for 2nd Degree Murder. Three weeks ago, Zimmerman’s trial before a jury of six women began in Seminole County, Florida. Tonight, that trial and the entire sixteen month saga came to an end when that jury found Zimmerman not guilty on all charges after just over 16 total hours of deliberations:

SANFORD, Fla. — George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who fatally shot Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager, igniting a national debate on racial profiling and civil rights, was found not guilty late Saturday night of second-degree murder. He was also acquitted of manslaughter, a lesser charge.

After three weeks of testimony, the six-woman jury rejected the prosecution’s contention that Mr. Zimmerman had deliberately pursued Mr. Martin because he assumed the hoodie-clad teenager was a criminal and instigated the fight that led to his death.

Mr. Zimmerman said he shot Mr. Martin on Feb. 26, 2012, in self-defense after the teenager knocked him to the ground, punched him and slammed his head repeatedly against the sidewalk. In finding him not guilty of murder or manslaughter, the jury agreed that Mr. Zimmerman could have been justified in shooting Mr. Martin because he feared great bodily harm or death.

The jury, which had been sequestered since June 24, deliberated 16 hours and 20 minutes over two days. The six female jurors entered the quiet, tense courtroom, several looking exhausted, their faces drawn and grim. After the verdict was read, each assented, one by one, and quietly, their agreement with the verdict.

The case began in the small city of Sanford as a routine homicide but soon evolved into a civil rights cause examining racial profiling and its consequences and setting off a broad discussion of race relations in America. Mr. Martin, with his gray hooded sweatshirt and his Skittles — the candy he was carrying — became its catalyst.

Even President Obama weighed in a month after the shooting, expressing sympathy for Mr. Martin’s family and urging a thorough investigation. “If I had a son,” Mr. Obama said, “he’d look like Trayvon.”

Saturday night when the verdict was read, Mr. Zimmerman, 29, smiled slightly. His wife, Shellie, and several of his friends wept, and his parents kissed and embraced.

Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin, who lost their son a few weeks after his 17th birthday, were not in the courtroom.

After the verdict, Judge Debra S. Nelson of Seminole County Court, told Mr. Zimmerman, who has been in hiding and wears a bulletproof vest outside, that his bond was revoked and his GPS monitor would be cut off. “You have no further business with the court,” she said.

Outside the courthouse, perhaps a hundred protesters who had been gathering through the night, their numbers building as the hours passed, began pumping their fists in the air, waving placards and chanting “No justice, no peace!” Sheriff’s deputies lined up inside the courthouse, watching the crowd, who were chanting peacefully, but intently.

The shooting also brought attention to Florida’s expansive self-defense laws. The laws allow someone with a reasonable fear of great bodily harm or death to use lethal force, even if retreating from danger is an option. In court, the gunman is given the benefit of the doubt.

The outcry began after the police initially decided not to arrest Mr. Zimmerman, who is half-Peruvian, as they investigated the shooting. Mr. Martin, 17, had no criminal record and was on a snack run, returning to the house where he was staying as a guest.

Six weeks later, Mr. Zimmerman was arrested, but only after civil rights leaders championed the case and demonstrators, many wearing hoodies, marched in Sanford, Miami and elsewhere to demand action.

“Justice for Trayvon!” they shouted.

The pressure prompted Gov. Rick Scott of Florida to remove local prosecutors from the case and appoint the state attorney from Jacksonville, Angela B. Corey. She ultimately charged Mr. Zimmerman with second-degree murder. The tumult also led to the firing of the Sanford police chief.

Through it all, Mr. Martin’s parents said they sought one thing: That Mr. Zimmerman have his day in court.

“We promised that we would seek justice for Trayvon Martin,” she said. Paraphrasing prosecutor John Guy’s closing statements in the case, Corey said:

“To the living we owe respect. To the dead, we owe the thruth. We have shown respect to the living and we believe we have brought out the truth on behalf of Trayvon Martin.”

Outside the courthouse, deputies and other law enforcement were dealing with a crowd of about 100 people, many of whom were disappointed with the verdict

Zimmerman, who says he fired in self-defense, had faced up to life in prison if convicted as charged. Instead, he will go free.

During the trial, jurors heard from an array of witnesses, including police, forensics experts and Zimmerman’s neighbors at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, where he shot Trayvon amid a struggle minutes after reporting the teen to police as suspicious Feb. 26, 2012.

No one who testified saw how the fatal conflict between the Neighborhood Watch volunteer and the high school junior from Miami Gardens began.

In his closing argument, prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda told jurors Zimmerman was a “wannabe cop,” tired of criminals victimizing his community, who decided to take the law into his own hands when he saw Trayvon walking through the rain and assumed he was up to no good.

“A teenager is dead because a man made certain assumptions,” de la Rionda said. “… and because his assumptions were wrong, Trayvon Benjamin Marin no longer walks on this Earth.”

De la Rionda described Trayvon as an “innocent 17-year-old kid” who was “profiled as a criminal.”

The verdict brings the ultra-high-profile trial to a close. The case sparked widespread protests last year when Zimmerman wasn’t arrested by Sanford police, who said the evidence couldn’t overcome his self-defense claim.

I haven’t written much of anything about the Zimmerman trial since it began in late June. Partly that was because I wasn’t following it closely enough directly to feel as though I was able to comment on it, and partly because I really don’t see the kind of instant trial analysis that was occurring on each of the cable networks covering the case to be of any value. Indeed, I think that kind of analysis tends to cloud the way that viewers see the case because, unlike the jurors, they are being exposed not just to what unfolds when the camera shows witness testimony but also what they analysts, both pro-defense and pro-prosecution, are telling them. The feeling was reinforced as I watched this case being discussed on social media over the past three weeks and it became apparent to me that many people had already made up their minds about Zimmerman’s guilt or innocence and were viewing the case accordingly. Rulings that Judge Debra Nelson, the presiding Judge, made that were in favor of one side or the others were viewed as being part of some conspiracy. Even when she denied the Defense’s Motion for Judgment of Acquittal at the end of the State’s case, something that happens in pretty much every criminal case given that Judges are loathe to take a case out of a jury’s hands unless there’s simply no evidence to support guilt, it was seen by Zimmerman supporters as a sign that he was the victim of a judicial set-up.

Now, while I didn’t watch all of the trial, I have watched portions of it, and read about day-to-day events elsewhere to form some basic impressions. Based on that, I’ve got to say that I don’t find this outcome surprising. From the beginning, my general impression was that the prosecution’s case was weak, especially for 2nd Degree Murder, which I never thought was an appropriate charge to begin with since they never seemed to be able to prove the intent element of that crime. Indeed, several of the witnesses that the State called, from police investigators to at least two of the neighbors that acted in response to signs of a struggle outside their homes that fateful night, seemed to be more helpful to Zimmerman’s self-defense claim than they were to establishing the elements of either the primary charge of 2nd Degree Murder or the lesser included offense of Manslaughter. Additionally, the prosecutors chose to put into evidence several statements that Zimmerman had voluntarily given to the Sanford Police Department about the incident that night, including a video he participated in the day after the incident in which he walked through his version of what happened the night before with investigating detectives. While there were some minor inconsistencies between several of these statements, none of those inconsistencies seemed extreme enough to doubt his credibility and all of them were consistent with the basic outline of his story that Martin attacked him first, they ended up on the ground with Martin punching him, and that he only ended up shooting Martin when he thought his life was in jeopardy. Additionally, several of the State’s witnesses just seemed to hurt their case — including their so-called “star” witness Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with Martin moments before his encounter with Zimmerman, and Medical Examiner Shiping Bao, whose testimony came across very badly compared to the expert that the Defense had hired, Dr. Vincent Di Maio, a nationally recognized pathologist.

In the end, as always, it was the state’s burden to prove that George Zimmerman was guilty of the charges against him beyond a reasonable doubt. By the time the case came to an end, there seemed to be a general consensus among observers that they had not done so, most certainly not with regard to 2nd Degree Murder and that the odds of getting a Manslaughter conviction seemed to slip away as well. Although I had assumed for a long time that Zimmerman would have to take the stand in his defense in order to fully be able to relate the self-defense theory to the jury, that proved to not be necessary are at all thanks largely to the fact that the prosecution had put all of Zimmerman’s previous statements to law enforcement into evidence. So, it was no surprise when he told the Judge shortly before the defense rested that he would not be testifying. There really wasn’t any need for him to do so and, in terms of the risks of cross-examination, the risks were far too great. Instead, his attorneys put on a defense that poked holes in the remaining parts of the state’s case. Additionally, while both sides put on strong closing statements, defense attorney Mark O’Mara’s was a tutorial in the touchstone of criminal defense attorneys, reasonable doubt, and it was obviously enough to convince the jury. Adding all of that together, we had a case where the state simply failed to meet its burden notwithstanding being represented by a trio of attorneys who were quite skilled, and quite passionate in presentation of the case the were given.

First of all, it’s worth reminding everyone that the standard here is that it’s the state’s obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That is an incredibly high standard. It means that someone who actually committed a crime could go free if the evidence presented to the jury suggests that there’s another reasonable interpretation of what happened, or if the state isn’t able to produce sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. So, being found “not guilty” doesn’t mean the Defendant didn’t do it, but it does mean it couldn’t be proven within the bounds of the law, and it reflects the value that we’ve placed on ensuring that only someone who is assuredly guilty goes to prison (or gets executed). As the old saying goes, it’s better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man goes to prison.

Second, the criminal justice system is about a quest for the truth within the bounds of the law, not a quest for “justice” for the victim. That means, for example, that evidence that doesn’t meet the applicable evidentiary standard won’t get before the jury, that statements the Defendant made to the police while in custody but without being advised of their rights will be excluded, and that protection of the Defendants constitutional rights will bar the introduction of illegally seized or unreliable evidence. Some of that evidence might arguably to a quest for “justice,” but it’s not relevant to a quest for truth within the bounds of the law. If you’re looking for “justice” for the victim, you’ll have to search somewhere else because it won’t come from a courtroom.

In the end, George Zimmerman is a free man because the state couldn’t prove the case against him. Based on what I’ve read about the trial I think that is the correct result, but even if I didn’t I would be reminded of a quote first attributed to the great English lawyer William Blackstone that goes “it is better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man go to prison.” For that reason alone, I’d suggest that Zimmerman’s acquittal is a sign of a system working exactly the way it’s supposed to. This trial was the work of our legal system. It wasn’t perfect, and I’d argue that the the presence of the cameras and the media attention tended to overhype and pervert things significantly, but this is the system we have, and its better than all the others. Rather than screaming outrage, I suggest we all marvel at the fact that we’re able to accomplish something like this in a civilized manner.

About Doug MataconisDoug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May, 2010 and also writes at Below The Beltway.
Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Zimmerman instigates the entire event by stalking a kid he believes to be suspicious, the police instruct him to not follow Martin, he does, a scuffle ensues and Zimmerman murders Martin. How could the jury not find Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter? Basically, Martin died solely for the crime of being Black.

1. A grown ass man followed a child at night and in the dark.
2. A grown ass man ignored the instructions of the police dispatcher.
3. A grown ass man got out of his car and followed a child.
4. When said child confronted said grown ass man, grown ass man SHOT the child.
5. Child dies.
6. Grown ass man gets away with killing a child.

@al-Ameda: Several assumptions you make there were disputed in a trial (your claim of “stalking”, your claim of a police instruction, and your claim that Zimmerman was not following a police instruction), and were not proven.

I never for a minute thought Zimmerman would be convicted, because the only person who can testify to whether Zimmerman instigated the confrontation is dead. But no one will ever convince me that Zimmerman is not responsible for Martin’s death. Perhaps not in the legal sense, but it is without doubt that had Zimmerman’s actions that night led to the death of a teenager.

Those celebrating tonight need to look within themselves and ask what exactly they are celebrating.

Emmet Till in 1955 in Mississippi at least committed the “sin” of whistling at a white woman. Trayvon Martin in 2013 was just out walking. Same result- a black teenager gets killed for no result and the killers walk. Yup, American justice- best in the world.
Glad Doug thinks the result was achieved in a “civilized” manner. Now I’m trying to understand what’s so “civilized” about a black teenager being stalked, approached and shot to death by someone who subsequently got off scot free. “Civilized” isn’t the term that came to my mind. But then if I had a teenage son, he would be in danger from Zimmerman. I am pretty sure that if Doug had a teenage son, the son would be in no danger from Zimmerman. Guess that is just what it came down to. Lets face it, none of the jurors sons would have been in danger from Zimmerman either.

Oh well, maybe there will be a wrongful death suit, although given Florida juries, the result may be just the same. Or maybe Zimmerman may one day get the same “justice” he meted out to Trayvon . Now THAT would be “civilized”.

@PD Shaw: “Several assumptions you make there were disputed in a trial (your claim of “stalking”, your claim of a police instruction, and your claim that Zimmerman was not following a police instruction), and were not proven. ”

Yes, well, when the murderer is the only one left alive to testify, it’s hard to prove the case against him. I’m sure we’ll all take note of that lesson.

@al-Ameda: Several assumptions you make there were disputed in a trial (your claim of “stalking”, your claim of a police instruction, and your claim that Zimmerman was not following a police instruction), and were not proven.

Well, I’ve heard a police dispatch tape replayed on radio many times, the audio where Zimmerman clearly was instructed by police dispatch to not follow Martin, that the police were going to take it from there. That tape was was not in evidence at the trial?

It doesn’t matter now though – Zimmerman caused the entire tragic even to happen and that was not a factor that gave the jurors pause to consider manslaughter.

@Ed in NJ: “Those celebrating tonight need to look within themselves and ask what exactly they are celebrating. ”

That’s easy. Look at all of Jenos’ masturbatory posts. He’s celebrating a wannabee loser who was able to kill a minority and get away with it. He’s celebrating his own fantasized toughness, and for one tiny second is able to ignore the fact that he is an insignificant speck on the sole of the world’s shoe.

There was no real evidence one way or the other about how the fight actually started. Reasonable doubt means that in the absence of evidence we have to assume the version most helpful the defense, which is that Martin attacked Zimmerman without provocation.

That Zimmerman is responsible for Martin’s death has never been in contention. The question was whether he was culpable for Martin’s death. He is not as his action that resulted in Martin’s death, the discharge of his firearm, is justifiable as self defense.

@al-Ameda: “We don’t need you to do that” was a suggestion, not an instruction, as the 911 operator clearly testified to at the very beginning of the trial. Your desperate clinging to a complete distortion of that point simply means you don’t give a damn about the truth or a just verdict. What you wanted was a political outcome that you could use.

In Florida, if you’re a Neighborhood Watch captain you can shoot an unarmed person you suspect to be “suspicious looking,'” and as long as no one is around to witness it, you’re account of what happened will prevail in court.

This was certainly no surprise. I think this was a wrongful death but there was never any evidence that proved it “beyond a reasonable doubt.” It was always a he said he said where one of the he’s was dead and couldn’t say anything. George Zimmerman is also a victim here. He was an insecure little man with illusions of grandeur, a gun and a position he never should have had. A hero a wanabe who was no hero at all – just a frightened little man.

On the tape, right after the operator says those words, Zimmerman’s breathing slows indicating he either stopped or slowed his “following”, which was actually going in the direction Martin was last scene to answer the operator’s question about which way Martin went. Following is a questionable term given Zimmerman didn’t know where Martin was other than he’d gone between the buildings.

Several assumptions you make there were disputed in a trial (your claim of “stalking”

It´s true that I live in a country that´s fair more violent than a gated community in Florida, but as far as I understand one should NEVER enter contact with strangers in the middle of the night in a area where there is no movement of people, specially if you are alone. Precisely because you can be confounded with a mugger or something worse than that.

We don’t need you to do that” was a suggestion, not an instruction, as the 911 operator clearly testified

Suggestion, huh? If Zimmerman was black and Trayvon was white, would you still have viewed that as “just a suggestion?” Well, of course not.
Indeed, let’s be blunt here. If Zimmerman was black and Trayvon was white, is there any doubt that he would have been arrested, charged, and held without bail from that night on?
Is there any doubt that the right wingers now celebrating would have never defended Zimmerman’s actions?
Is there any doubt really that if Zimmerman were black, he would have been convicted of at least manslaughter? Because there is no doubt in my mind.

Your desperate clinging to a complete distortion of that point simply means you don’t give a damn about the truth or a just verdict.

Wow, so now its a “just verdict”, eh? Even all the defenders of the verdict could not bring themselves to to describe the verdict as “just.” The best they could do was “lawful.”
So tell me again what was just about an armed man following and shooting dead an unarmed black teenager who was walking home from the store, and then getting off scott free. What is “just” about that?

That’s because you are apparently a racist. There is no doubt that given the same circumstances except for race, a black Zimmerman would not have been indicted nor arrested. In fact, we wouldn’t know anything about it because there would have been no political pressure to arrest and prosecute.

who was walking home from the store

You left out the aggravated assault part. There is no doubt that had Martin lived he would have been arrested for aggravated assault. And no, not because he was black, but because Zimmerman had obviously been assaulted but there were not injuries to Martin to indicate the assault was mutual. Had the police arrived while Martin was astride Zimmerman and hitting him, Martin would have been pulled off and arrested. Physically attacking a person, even if it is proven they were following you, is illegal. And no, it’s not Stand your Ground as Zimmerman at no time tried to physically threaten or force Martin to leave a place he was lawfully permitted.

Dwayne Wade needs to give his kids “The Talk” just like the rest of us do. Being wealthy is scant, if any, protection. Bill Cosby, for instance, lost a son to a real racist, not a well-meaning but unfortunately well armed dim wit like the Martin’s did, but the result is the same.

Yes, your point is well taken. Zimmerman was clearly looking for a way to direct the police towards Martin, not some kind of pursuit to kill him.

Strangely enough, Zimmerman managed to end up where Trayvon was, in a confrontation with Trayvon, with the police nowhere in sight. Gee, how did that happen?
I have been in situations where I have had to call the police, and in every such situation, the police come to ME. I never maneuver the situation to where I am alone with a suspicious person. I guess I must be doing it wrong.
Next time I’ll arm myself, follow them in a car, get out of the car, and follow them on foot, without notifying the police about exactly where I am. I’ll also make sure I shoot the person dead. No loose ends. Then if I claim I was in fear of my life, I’ll be acquitted.
But wait a second-and here the fantasy ends-I’m black ! That rule only works if you are a white person.Silly me.

If Trayvon Martin was white this story would have gotten very little publicity. The media loves to play the race, ethnicity, religion, gender, abortion, etc. game to stir up trouble, and like the sheep that most Americans are, they play right into their hands.

I agree with Doug, I think this was simply a case of the prosecutors overcharging. If they had charged him with manslaughter and presented that case, they may have had a better chance of convicting George Zimmerman.

Also agree that our system working correctly, and justice being done are not always synonymous terms. I’ve always been of the opinion that in criminal cases with serious consequences (like the possibility of a life sentence), even “probably did it” should not be enough to convict … and in this case, especially on the 2nd Degree murder charge, I’m not even sure the prosecution even proved “probably did it”.

I don’t personally “like” this outcome (although honestly, it’s not really any of my business one way or another) … but I do think it was probably “correct”.

That’s because you are apparently a racist. There is no doubt that given the same circumstances except for race, a black Zimmerman would not have been indicted nor arrested. In fact, we wouldn’t know anything about it because there would have been no political pressure to arrest and prosecute.

So, a black man can shoot an unarmed white teenager dead in suspicious circumstances and not get arrested and charged? I can’t even write that out without laughing.Seriously, what universe do you live in? Because here on Earth Prime, I have never heard of anything happening that even remotely resembles that. Tell you what, why don’t you scour the Internet and bring me links to cases of black men shooting unarmed white teenagers dead and never being charged or arrested. Since you say this can happen, I’m sure you can back this up by citing examples. Take all the time you need.

Had the police arrived while Martin was astride Zimmerman and hitting him, Martin would have been pulled off and arrested.

Ah, there’s the rub. How did that fight start? Did Zimmerman initiate the hostilities by trying to detain Trayvon and did Trayvon start winning a fight that Zimmerman started? WE don’t know because :
1. Zimmerman did not call the police to the location.
2. Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin dead, so Trayvon can’t give his explanation of why the fight started.

What’s quite clear is that had Zimmerman not followed Martin, then gotten out of his car, there would have been no fight. All the whitesplaining in the world won’t get around that fact.

I doubt they can sue. In many states, although I don’t know about Florida, have laws that preclude civil suits where justifiable self defense is determined.

On the other hand, the parents have already collected from the only money pot available, the HOA. A judgement for damages against Zimmernan is unlikely to ever be paid. He’s got massive legal bills and is unlikely to find a good job, at least for a good long while.

Of course, he wouldn’t have gotten his ass kicked if he listened to the cops and didn’t follow the kid

Zimmerman had every right to follow Martin. To say that following invited the attack and therefore Zimmerman initiated the conflict is like saying that it was your neighbors fault he was bit by your dog because he walked by your driveway. Ridiculous.

The telling point of course is that under Florida law Zimmerman did nothing illegal prior to the conflict. Zimmerman had no duty to retreat.

Question: Why are kids required to wear helmets when they ride a bike? Because they might fall and hit their head on the sidewalk and suffer serious injury. Injury is not required to have occurred, only that the threat be reasonable and imminent.

If Trayvon Martin was white this story would have gotten very little publicity

Indeed, if Trayvon Martin were white and George Zimmerman black, Zimmerman would have been arrested, charged, held without bail, tried, and convicted-without doubt. There would have been publicity, though-from right wingers screaming and yelling about Zimmerman being a “black racist” out to “get whitey”.

Based on my admittedly sketchy interest in this case, I’d have voted to acquit. In the closing argument the DA was arguing common sense, not evidence. There really wasn’t any evidence to anything beyond the barest facts: that Zimmerman killed Martin. The law may be an ass, but it’s the tool we use. It’s what we have.

It’s not the job of juries to extract blood money, some sort of penance for tragedy. It’s their job to decide whether or not the state proved its case. I see no reason to doubt their verdict.

The truth of the matter is he provoked the entire incident by trying to play hero instead of doing what the officers told him to.

If I saw someone strange to my neighborhood walking through I might very well follow them to. I’ve done it before and I’ll likely do it again. I’m not provoking anything – I’m simply being a good neighbor to my community. If someone doesn’t care for me following them they are free to stop and ask me questions about why I’m following them.

The telling point of course is that under Florida law Zimmerman did nothing illegal prior to the conflict. Zimmerman had no duty to retreat.

Actually we don’t know whether Zimmerman did anything illegal because he conveniently killed the only witness that could dispute his story that he was doing nothing illegal.
The case nicely demonstrates what’s wrong with a no duty to retreat rule-if you kill someone, then claim they were assaulting you, your version of what happened stands undisputed, and you walk on a self defense claim. Don’t worry, though, one day a person of the “right color”-maybe some blonde girl- will get killed, the killer will walk, and then Florida will change the law.

Zimmermann must have a hard head indeed, to have only 2 dinky lacerations to his scalp ofter such a savage beating.

Anyone who had ever been around a real fight could tell you that having your head repeatedly bashed against concret leaves one in need of a trip to the ER, not a few band aids.

Sorry but you need to study up on your law a bit. The threat of serious bodily harm or death doesn’t have to be instant or immediate, it just has to be a situation where a reasonable person might reasonably be in fear of serious bodily harm or death.

Besides, the idea that Zimmerman should be waiting for some “standard” of harm to be alreadyachieved against him before protecting himself is simply nonsense.

The version I believe is that Martin turned the tables on Zimmerman because Zimmerman was carrying a gun and following him – a very provocative act.

I suspect that’s what happened to. But convictions shouldn’t be based on what people suspect happened. So as much as I’d like to see Zimmerman go to jail, I think you have to acquit based on the evidence available.

Don’t worry, though, one day a person of the “right color”-maybe some blonde girl- will get killed, the killer will walk, and then Florida will change the law.

Race baiting nonsense. The exact same garbage that made the prosecutors reverse themselves and decide to pursue charges after deciding not to charge Zimmerman when it happened, and the same garbage that prompted the media to call Zimmerman a “white-hispanic.” In other words, they created a brand-new category of ethnicity to try and make this look like a white-on-black racially based incident.

A reasonable person would not arm himself and drive around the neighborhood trying to live out his cop fantasy. A reasonable person would keep his ass in the truck if he really thought he was following a suspicious guy who might be packing.

@crysalis: Bullshit…the first thing any logical person would have done is call the cops and let them handle it.

Ummmm…No. In my neighborhood we regularly look out for each other by, for example, going out to talk to someone in a strange car that has been parked on the side of the street for “too” long to see what’s what.

This notion that Zimmerman was “looking” for trouble by exercising his right to move freely and follow Martin through his neighborhood is blaming him for Martin attacking him.

So I guess in your opinion it really was the girl’s fault she was molested or raped because she could have chosen to wear less revealing clothes? Somehow, I think not…

@JKB: Immunity from civil suits under Florida law only attaches under the Stand Your Ground Law, which is granted by a judge if he/she finds that the defendant acted in self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence. Zimmerman has not sought any relief under SYG, but its my understanding that Zimmerman can now make a post-trial motion to this judge for SYG immunity, and (I suspect if she denies it), appeal that denial to the Appellate Court. Or he might wait for a civil suit to be filed, with the hope of getting a better judge.

If the Martin family sues and Zimmerman is granted immunity, they may be required to reimburse his defense costs and lost wages.

If they had charged him with manslaughter and presented that case, they may have had a better chance of convicting George Zimmerman.

Actually, they did send manslaughter to the jury. While I think second degree may have too much, manslaughter would have been within reach.
In any case, I think the no-retreat rule was what really made it tough for the state.

There is a possibility of a wrongful death action. Hey, that’s how they got OJ.
But then again, Florida is a southern jurisdiction and it will be a southern jury. In the real world, that matters.

@Stormy Dragon: If you mean Zimmerman confronted Martin with a gun unholstered, I find it difficult to believe the girl on the phone would not have heard Martin say something about a gun. I think its more likely, regardless of whom you believe was following whom (a contested point) and who approached whom (another contested point), there was probably a bit of surprise, fear (Z thought M was a criminal; M thought Z was a gay rapist), and escalating fighting words.

@crysalis: Then you guys aren’t doing your job correctly. The neighborhood watch job is to watch, if you see something suspicious or dangerous…..you call the cops and let them handle it.

So now you’re going to tell me the proper way to approach how we watch out for our neighborhood? That’s just a bit arrogant of you isn’t it? Particularly if my neighborhood were to be located, for example, in a state that has the Castle Doctrine, where my duties to protect my neighbor might very well involve shooting a burgler dead if I catch him breaking into the house next to me.

You don’t get to decide these things, even though you apparently feel that you should be allowed to.

@crysalis: There are guidelines for Neighborhood watch groups to avoid incidents exactly like this. They aren’t the police, their job is to watch and report. Zimmerman failed at his job…….he should have simply listened to the police and none of this would have happened.

To make matters worse, what so suspicious about a kid on his cell phone and eating skittles while walking home? Not only shouldn’t he had followed him, he shouldn’t even had called the cops.

Particularly if my neighborhood were to be located, for example, in a state that has the Castle Doctrine, where my duties to protect my neighbor might very well involve shooting a burgler dead if I catch him breaking into the house next to me.

The problem here is that we don’t know exactly what Zimmerman did-for the very good reason that he killed the person who could contradict his story.
Were words exchanged?
Did Zimmerman try to grab him?
Who approached who first?
We don’t know-because Zimmerman killed the only other person who could contradict him.
You seem to just accept as accurate Zimmerman’s story that all he did was follow him,and then Martin somehow decided, without provocation, to attack a man that was older than him, bigger than him, and who had followed him at night by car and then on foot.
That’s not really a credible story, but since Martin isn’t around to contradict it….

Trayvon Martin was stalked by George Zimmerman because he was black. Trayvon Martin is dead because he was black. George Zimmerman was acquitted of killing Trayvon Martin because the boy Zimmerman killed was black.

If you deny these things, you are either a liar or an idiot, or possibly both.

Seems odd that so many conservatives are so happy to see a young black man boy shot for no reason, and his killer walk free.

Nice bit of straw-man snottiness there, but my response dealt directly with the points you brought up in your post. If you can’t respond effectively, why waste time on whining? I’m sure it makes you feel better but it really doesn’t reflect well on your position.

Duty to retreat wouldn’t have changed the outcome. If Zimmerman’s story is true, he was on his back with someone ontop of him. You can’t really retreat from that.

You misunderstand duty to retreat. It applies to more than the moment right before the shooting.

In the criminal law, the duty to retreat is a specific component which sometimes appears in the defense of self-defense, and which must be addressed if the defendant is to prove that his or her conduct was justified. In those jurisdictions where the requirement exists, the burden of proof is on the defense to show that the defendant was acting reasonably. This is often taken to mean that the defendant had first avoided conflict and secondly, had taken reasonable steps to retreat and so demonstrated an intention not to fight before eventually using force

George Zimmerman’s pursuit of Martin, first by car then by foot, becomes relevant to show that he avoided conflict. One doesn’t “avoid conflict” by saying, “These punks always get away with it”, then following someone in a car then on foot.

Seems odd that so many conservatives are so happy to see a young black man boy shot for no reason, and his killer walk free.

They are happy because they see themselves doing just what Zimmerman did-patrolling their neighborhood with their deadly little “penis enhancers” , rousting “punks”(minority teenagers) and playing Dirty Harry. And they have just been told that if things get “out of hand” and they kill one of them, the law will back them up.
This decision is a get out of jail free card for vigilantes. Heck, Zimmerman even gets his gun back.

Interesting that Jenos excused himself so early in the thread he has been waiting for his whole life and that “crysalis” is serving us the same tired BS that Jenos had been droning on about since this sad affair started.

1, That “no snitching” has not become the official policy of the government.
2. That whites do not have to prove themselves innocent beyond a reasonable doubt as was suggested by the prosecutor in his closing state.
3. That neighborhood watch programs can continue and that residents can still have an interest in crime prevention.
4. That conceal carry guy laws will not be attacked.
5. That self-defense laws and stand your ground laws survive instead of the take the beating argument that too many of the left made.
6. That calling 911 is not racist.
7. That being interested in law enforcement is not racist and that being a “wannabe cop” does not make one racist.
8. That following every suggestion of law enforcment is not something that whites will always be requried to do but that blacks will never be asked to do.
9. That there is no excuse for blacks to not call 911. If a “creepy-ass cracker” is following you, call 911 instead of taking it to resolve on your own.

That many on the left keep getting this wrong shows their real agenda. Whites must follow every request of the police while blacks are free to ignore the police at all times because the police are racist.

The left seems to want absolute compliance for whites but not from blacks. Another case of separate and unequal.

I guess Zimmerman did not know is place in society. Why do progressives hate crime prevention and people taking an interest in their own neighborhood so much. Why shouldn’t blacks put as much interest in crime prevention in their own neighborhoods as they put into wanting Zimmerman punished.

1. A “creepy-ass cracker” followed a 17-year-old young man at night, in the dark, in the rain from a distance, which is no crime.

2. A “creepy-ass cracker” was informed by the 911 operator that he “didn’t need” to follow him, and stopped following him.

2A. The 911 operator explicitly testified that he didn’t “instruct” Zimmerman to do anything, as the dispatchers have an explicit policy to not give any kinds of instructions.

3. A “creepy-ass cracker” got out of his truck when he could no longer keep the 17-year-old young man in sight while in his vehicle.

3A. The 17-year-old young man reached the back yard of the home where he was staying, complaining on the phone about the “creepy-ass cracker.”

4. The 17-year-old young man and the “creepy-ass cracker” met over 100 yards from the back yard of the home and had a confrontation. During said confrontation, the “creepy-ass cracker” had his nose broken and his head pounded into the pavement repeatedly. The “creepy-ass cracker” likely had, as a doctor testified, blood from his nose flowing down his throat, choking him. The 17-year-old young man (who was taller than the “creepy-ass cracker” and in better physical shape) had no injuries whatsoever except for some skinned knuckles and a single gunshot wound.

5. The 17-year-old young man dies of that single gunshot wound.

6. (I’m gonna steal this summation from one Robert Wargas: “So a Hispanic shoots a black and is acquitted by women, but it’s still white men’s fault.”

@al-Ameda: Zimmerman instigates the entire event by stalking a kid he believes to be suspicious, the police instruct him to not follow Martin, he does, a scuffle ensues and Zimmerman murders Martin. How could the jury not find Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter? Basically, Martin died solely for the crime of being Black.

You keep using the word “stalking.” Bullshit. Florida has a very precise legal definition of “stalking,” and Zimmerman’s actions come nowhere near qualifying as “stalking.”

And as noted above, you’re also lying when you say “the police instruct him to not follow Martin, he does.” 1) the 911 operator was NOT a police officer, 2) the operator very carefully followed policy and did NOT give any instructions, and 3) Zimmerman DID stop following Martin after the operator stated “we don’t need you to do that.”

Three lies in nine words. One every three words. Is that a personal record for you?

What is amazing is that blacks in the U.S. who have for decades taken a “F’ the Police” attitude are staking their entire claim of murder on the fact that Zimmerman did not follow the advice of the police.

If blacks want others to obey the police, then they should have been leading by example for the last few decades instead of using their distrust of the police for committing crimes, no snitchin, and cheering murderers like OJ.

1) Zimmerman made some poor decisions that night, but at no point prior to the fight did he do anything illegal.

2) Martin, after noticing he was being followed, did NOT run or call the police or call for help in any way, shape or form. He instead called his girlfriend, Rachel Jenteal, and complained about the “creepy-ass cracker.”

3) According to the testimony of Jenteal, Martin had reached the back yard of the home where he was staying.

4) Several minutes later, Martin and Zimmerman met about 100 yards or further from that home and a fight ensued.

5) Zimmerman claimed that he did not initiate the fight, and never landed a single blow during the fight. Under Zimmerman’s account, Martin punched him in face, knocking him down, then got on top of him and continued to beat Zimmerman while he was pinned down, pounding his head against the pavement.

6) The physical evidence is consistent with Zimmerman’s account. He had a broken nose and several cuts to the back of his head. Martin had no injuries except some skinned knuckles and a single gunshot wound.

7) A medical expert testified that Zimmerman’s injuries most likely left him choking on blood flowing down his throat from his broken nose and dazed from repeated blows to the head.

The fallout from this case ought to be severe. I said at the outset that the prosecution “did a crappy job.” That’s a severe understatement The prosecution broke quite a few rules and laws in the course of the case, including withholding evidence from the defense and (unsuccessfully) attempting to introduce a whole new legal theory for guilt at the last minute. SHe fired the whistleblower who publicized that they had withheld evidence. She also threatened Alan Dershowitz when he criticized her actions.

The blacks of Sanford aren’t bitching all that much. They know better than to expect a conviction, they got what they needed out of having a trial. That’s enough to discourage the ones they really fear.

The most prominent feature in this is public distrust of police within a landscape of the history of race relations in the south. This is not a slam on the south, in some ways it’s not as bad as racism in the north. It’s mainly different in that there are hard lines which have developed. As long as everybody abides by them, and things remain pretty civil, but there is less tolerance for the crossing. The protests are mainly in CA and up north, not in the south, as you can see.

The line that got crossed here was they demand there be trials when their kids get gunned down, just like white people get. They don’t expect conviction, they know the what US courts are like, but without the threat of arrests and trials it’s open season again, just like the bad old days.

What you are saying makes no sense. If blacks do not trust the police and refuse to cooperate with the police, then why would they expect Zimmerman to follow the instructions of the police to the letter. You cannot scream ” F the Police” for years and then tell the jury to believe everything that the prosecution and the police are saying. If blacks want a better criminal justice system, they have to stop being hypocrites when it comes to expectations for their own behavior versus non-blacks.

@crysalis: Nice bit of straw-man snottiness there, but my response dealt directly with the points you brought up in your post. If you can’t respond effectively, why waste time on whining? I’m sure it makes you feel better but it really doesn’t reflect well on your position.

@<a href="#comment-1769955" It occurs to me that a lot of the people above are still citing those lies as if they were factual. I'll let them argue that they're doing so out of ignorance, and not malice.

@al-Ameda: “In Florida, if you’re a Neighborhood Watch captain you can shoot an unarmed person you suspect to be “suspicious looking,’” and as long as no one is around to witness it, you’re account of what happened will prevail in court. ”

You really believe that? You think that if a black neighborhood watch captain shoots an unarmed white person, he’ll prevail in Florida court?

If the black neighborhood watch member had a broken nose and cuts on the back of his head and there were witness who said that he was on the bottom of the fight while the white 17 y/o male was on top, then changes would probably have never been made. No prosecutor would have touched the case because the black grievance industry would have made their life miserable.

However, a better question is how many blacks participate in neighborhood watch versus adopt the “No Snitch” code? How many blacks bother to get a conceal carry permit rather than just illegally carry? How many blacks ever call 911 to report suspected criminals? How many blacks would even care if their neighbors had been robbed in the past? How many blacks even bother to show up for jury duty?

Also, if the 17 y/o white involved in the fight had a cell phone full of violent and racist text messages, I suspect they would have been admitted as evidence. I suspect the media would have gone crazy if the 17 y/o white had used racist phrases to describe a black man rather than trying to convince everyone such phrases were not really racist. Also, if the dead person would have been white, who would be the white activist to take the roles of Shaprton, Crump, Jesse Jackson. Would the president have bothered to say anything about it. If you can explain who the white equivalent of Al Sharpton is, the you wold have a stronger argument.

@crysalis: So say I’m sitting in my car in your neighborhood. Who knows why? Maybe I need to make a call. Maybe I’m listening to the radio. Maybe I just like parking there. I’ve got the right. You may live there, but you don’t own the streets.

And then this scary person comes pounding on my car window, demanding to know what the hell I think I’m doing there.

Well, I’m pretty scared. I think this thug is trying to carjack me. So using the castle doctrine, I pull out my Second Amendment Special and blows his head off.

So now what are you doing to do, Mr. or Ms Neighborhood Watch? Am I an upstanding citizen like Zimmerman now that the thug I killed is one of your friends? Does your defense of deadly force used by anyone who feels scared apply when it’s your kid who gets the bullet?

Why do progressives hate data so much that they will ignore any data that does not confirm their opinions. It has been amazing watching the liberal cable shows argue that blacks do not commit crimes at a higher rate than whites when every bit of Department of Justices shows the opposite.

Also, I am still waiting for someone to find the white equivalent of Al Sharpton but they will need to find someone who was found to have defamed others based on their race and currently have a show on a cable news channel.

Based on my admittedly sketchy interest in this case, I’d have voted to acquit. In the closing argument the DA was arguing common sense, not evidence. There really wasn’t any evidence to anything beyond the barest facts: that Zimmerman killed Martin. The law may be an ass, but it’s the tool we use. It’s what we have.

Sums up my feelings as well.

Zimmerman sounds like an asshole for sure, but for most of us its probably a good thing that that isn’t a criminal offense. He may also be a murderer, but that has to be shown beyond a reasonable doubt. If “likely to be a murderer” is enough to be convicted of murder (or even manslaughter), then we might as well not bother with trials at all.

The “Community Policers” are in-fact celebrating their own self-endangerment. The law is clear–if on the street I have no duty to retreat. If I fear for my life (because a stranger is following me and may be armed with ill intent) I may shoot and kill with no consequence.
“Police” away dummies! LOL

And Cysalis–you would never make it to my window buddy. If minding my own business, obeying the law, and I observed you approaching my vehicle–I would step out and ask your business because I don’t know you and car jacking is a threat. Please believe my hand would be on, lets call her “Betsy” who I keep conveniently concealed. I would hope you wouldn’t do anything at that point to make me fear for my life.

BTW Doug, your post was non-sense. The equivalent of celebrating the flavor of a crap sandwich because, well, it tastes better than a piss and crap sandwich. It is NOT the best system. We CAN do better and you know it. If you don’t realize that different standards of law apply to different groups ethnic and socio-economic–I pity you for the bubble you exist in. Reality beckons should you decide to search for it.

Best summary of the relevant evidence I’ve seen yet. In addition, there was evidence, presumably accepted as fact by the jury, that Mr. Martin was administering blows to Mr. Zimmerman while he had him pinned to the ground in MMA “ground & pound” style when Mr. Zimmerman fired the single shot that killed Mr. Martin.

This entire episode is a national tragedy, as well as a personal tragedy for all involved (especially the family of Mr. Martin). And I certainly do not condone the actions of Mr. Zimmerman, although a jury of his peers has now determined that they violated no criminal law.

The jury returned the only possible verdict it could properly return in a nation governed by the law.

What is needed now is for community leaders to come forward in a spirit of cooperation, mutual respect and respect for the law and work anew to drive out the societal issues that set up this tragic event to occur. When the immediate reaction to the verdict has subsided, those who can move forward in the common interest should work with even more focus and energy to stop the distrust and the violence.

If we’re going to extend the duty to retreat out that far, you could just as easily say Martin failed to obey it by turning around to ask Zimmerman why he was following him instead obeying his duty to retreat to the safety of his home.

If minding my own business, obeying the law, and I observed you approaching my vehicle–I would step out and ask your business because I don’t know you and car jacking is a threat.

If you think someone is approaching your vehicle with the intent of hijacking it, why in heaven’s name would you get out? Even ignoring the legal aspects of the situation, that’s just idiotic from a tactical standpoint.

WE DON’T KNOW THAT MARTIN ATTACKED HIM. All we have is Zimmerman’s word on that.

And since we don’t know, reasonable doubt means that for the purposes of the trial, we have to assume the version most helpful to defense.

I personally agree with you that Zimmerman is probably lying about how exactly it went down, but in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the jury made the right decision. The alternative is the Cameron Todd Willingham case, where we start convicting innocent people without real evidence because we just don’t want to buy their story about what happened.

A sad day for the lefty lunatic racist haters. Innocent man isn’t railroaded in state run circus trial. We know you’d be happier in any country where someone can just be determined to be an enemy of the state and executed.

A sad day for the lefty lunatic racist haters. Innocent man isn’t railroaded in state run circus trial. We know you’d be happier in any country where someone can just be determined to be an enemy of the state and executed.

Actually, it’s a good day for those who believe that the verdict in the Zimmerman trial, like the verdict in the OJ Simpson criminal trial, was a desirable outcome.

Actually, it’s a good day for those who believe that the verdict in the Zimmerman trial, like the verdict in the OJ Simpson criminal trial, was a desirable outcome.

Which is a good point. You’d expect people to have the same opinion on the OJ trial and the Zimmerman trial.

I’d hope most people would say that in both cases, the most desirable outcome was reached (ie not proven means not guilty). But I’d guess there are also those who say the justice system should be changed so both would be guilty (at least the outcry both today and in the case of the OJ trial suggests many were unhappy with the way the system works).

But I wonder how many people agree with one outcome and not the other? And if there are any, how they’d justify such an opinion.

@Stormy Dragon: “If you think someone is approaching your vehicle with the intent of hijacking it, why in heaven’s name would you get out? Even ignoring the legal aspects of the situation, that’s just idiotic from a tactical standpoint. ”

Doesn’t matter if it’s stupid. A Florida jury doesn’t care if you act stupid, as long as you can claim you were scared at the moment you decide to murder someone.

But you’re right. Much better to shoot from inside the car. Why take chances?

It’s a sad day for the lefty lunatic haters who wanted to see a Hispanic man railroaded on zero evidence. Unfortunately for them the state couldn’t persuade a jury that a man who acted in self defense wasn’t guilty because of their sanctimonius racist hatology.

@al-Ameda: Basically, Martin died solely for the crime of being Black.

No, he died solely for the crime of confronting and attacking a guy with a gun while being black. In other words, his race had nothing to do with it, just his conduct.

He was home and safe. He was in the back yard of the house where he was staying, and chose to go back down the pathway to confront the “creepy-ass cracker” and show him just who he was disrespecting. And he was well on his way to causing serious injury or death when he was shot.

@al-Ameda: You’ll forgive me if I “stalk” you a little over that, but you did say three incorrect things, and covered it up with yet another falsehood.

Unless you’re arguing that had the guy on top of Zimmerman pounding away at him been white, Zimmerman would have instead said “I say, my good man, if you’d be so kind as to stop the fisticuffs, I’ll take you down to the yacht club and we can settle this over drinks.”

Of course, it’s also possible that Martin had also heard of the break-ins in the neighborhood, and was concerned about leading this weird creep right back to his own home, where his unarmed relatives were waiting for him.

But no. Because you are a slavish Zimmerman acolyte, you know that Martin was concerned about being “disrespected.”

But that’s not because he was black or because you’re a racist dickhead, right? You know this through your super-ability to read the minds of dead children?

What you are saying makes no sense. If blacks do not trust the police and refuse to cooperate with the police, then why would they expect Zimmerman to follow the instructions of the police to the letter. You cannot scream ” F the Police” for years and then tell the jury to believe everything that the prosecution and the police are saying. If blacks want a better criminal justice system, they have to stop being hypocrites when it comes to expectations for their own behavior versus non-blacks.

What I wrote makes no sense…he says….but thanks for providing an excellent example of the problem for me anyway.

This is the kind of ignorance, fear, and hatred that blacks must be aware of, folks. He thinks all blacks run around yelling “F the police”, he really does. There are a lot of Superdestroyers out there.

Fear making people dangerous is is a very large feature of the “talk” black parents must give their young men. They need to be aware that their very presence is frightening to many whites, and must strive to put them at ease. Like Obama says “Don’t make any sudden moves.”

@anjin-san: It’s from the testimony of Rachel Jenteal. Martin was in the back yard of the house where he was staying when he turned back to confront the “creepy-ass cracker” who’d dared follow him from a distance.

Think of it as like your referring to Zimmerman as “stalking” Martin, but with an actual basis in fact.

@anjin-san: Here’s an annotated map of the neighborhood. Pay attention to Point 4 (the back yard of the home where Martin was staying) and Point 6 (where the fight took place). Martin, when bothered by Zimmerman’s following, didn’t call his father or the cops, but his girlfriend. And by the time he got home, he’d gotten over whatever fear he might have had and decided to go back and confront Zimmerman.

Martin’s actions were not the actions of someone feeling fear, but of someone feeling anger.

@Jenos Idanian: OK, let’s try that again. HERE’S the map. It’s largely based on Zimmerman’s statements and re-enactment with the police, but the prosecution’s witness established the accuracy of #4, and everyone agrees on #6.

@Stormy Dragon: Not one for reading comprehension I see. I said I would ask because I didn’t know. If I did know for sure…I suppose I should get out of the car blazing as it is now legally permissible to kill if I am in fear for my life. At any rate, if you and I are in a gunfight and you are inside a vehicle, and I have my mobility and access to more reliable cover. Guess who is at the tactical disadvantage?

@Jenos Idanian: “You can’t discuss the actual facts of the case, so you just keep calling people “racists” because, once upon a time, that was enough to shut them up.”

If history teaches us anything, it’s that nothing is enough to shut you up. Certainly not well deserved shame.

I call you racist because you express racist thoughts in a racist manner. To you, Trayvon Martin was a gang banger who attacked a white guy because he felt disrespected. You made this up out of your own fear and prejudice, nothing more.

The sad fact is, you probably aren’t even a real racist. That would require actually having some consistency of thought. No, I suspect that you’ve decided expressing racist sentiments and then whining when you’re called on it would annoy the maximum number of people, so that’s what you’ve adopted here.

Now SuperDope, he’s a real racist, and he’s proud of that. You’re not even that much of a man.

@wr: And I call you stupid because you are stupid. Astonishingly, mind-bogglingly, inconceivably stupid. And you back it up with a completely unfounded sense of superiority, when you actually suffer from delusions of adequacy.

@Jenos Idanian: Yes, Jenos, calling me stupid is a keen trick, guaranteed to win any argument. You are clearly a superior intellect, since you’ve discovered this astonshingly powerful debating tool. It completely covers up the fact that you have no response to the obvious fact that you are using racist tropes to describe this dead boy, and that the basis for your entire argument is the racist assumption that black kids are necessarily thugs.

But you don’t have to counter that any more than you did when I (and several others) exposed your obvious, desperate lies about the Republican attempt to end food stamps. You call me stupid, and we’re all so astonished at your wit we forget to notice you’ve never made a substantive point.

Unless you’re arguing that had the guy on top of Zimmerman pounding away at him been white, Zimmerman would have instead said “I say, my good man, if you’d be so kind as to stop the fisticuffs, I’ll take you down to the yacht club and we can settle this over drinks.”

Martin made a tragic mistake, going after a paranoid person who posessed a gun. Also, there was testimony at the trial that Zimmerman exaggerated the extent of his injuries, which were not consistent with the conservative meme that he (Zimmerman) was being beaten to death. The jury chose to ignore this and believed Zimmerman’s lies. This was an updated version of the O.J. Jury.

How many rap songs take the POV of “F the Police.” How many NBA stars have contributed to “No Snitchin” videos? How many black pundits say continually that the police and law enforcement cannot be trusted? How many blacks cheered OJ being acquitted?

Black culture in the U.S. undercuts law enforcement at every chance and takes a positive view of street violence and settling issues yourself. Is it any wonder that whites consider blacks the most racist demographic in the U.S.

@al-Ameda: What lies since he didn’t testify? The state presented witness after witness trying to concoct a non existent racial motive which the jury saw thru as the sanctimonious racist bullshit that it was. The only people who are disappointed with the verdict are the twisted racists who want revenge not justice.

@SuperDufus: Of course…all of them in your peasant fantasy land. They do nothing else only taking occasional breaks to spend the food stamps and welfare checks your tax money provides, make babies, and cause terror to peace-loving white people all the while secretly wishing they were like you– white and right.

@Maus Merryjest: While I’d agree that retreat is the most rational course of action…as would most reasonable people…the law does not. There is no duty to retreat and the threshold for unleashing deadly force is merely fear.

@al-Ameda: And who doesn’t remember the demonstrations and rioting, the President’s statement about the murder, the statements about how the jurors should all kill themselves, OJ dedicating his life for the search for justice? And where is he now?

@al-Ameda: And who doesn’t remember the demonstrations and rioting, the President’s statement about the murder, the statements about how the jurors should all kill themselves, OJ dedicating his life for the search for justice? And where is he now?

Look, if you still think that the verdict in the OJ criminal trial was the right outcome, go for it.

Black culture in the U.S. undercuts law enforcement at every chance and takes a positive view of street violence and settling issues yourself. Is it any wonder that whites consider blacks the most racist demographic in the U.S.

Of course racist Whites consider Blacks to the most racist people in America – what else is new? That’s a current Republican Talking Point.